J! archive glossary question

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

Post Reply
User avatar
TenPoundHammer
Otters are meant to swim
Posts: 8316
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:59 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

J! archive glossary question

Post by TenPoundHammer »

So is it just me, or is the glossary more than a bit out of date? To wit:

* The "STAY CLAM" entry has links to posts on the old, pre-2011, long-since-defunct Sony board. Should those be removed (or possibly archived if someone has them)?

* Were "Bridges's Rule", "Falk's Law", "fearful wager", "Jeeks's Rule", etc. ever actually a thing? I don't remember any of those ever coming up on the old board (although it's possible that they were long before I joined -- I honestly don't remember posting there until about 2009), and if Google is correct, none of them have ever been used here.

I also think that the glossary would benefit from some of the more contemporary terms. For instance, LTAM shows up a lot in this forum as shorthand for the "Less than a minute" warnings.
Ten Pound Hammer

This space for rent

User avatar
TenPoundHammer
Otters are meant to swim
Posts: 8316
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:59 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: J! archive glossary question

Post by TenPoundHammer »

Bumping since this never got any discussion going.
Ten Pound Hammer

This space for rent

User avatar
Rackme32
Three-time Failer Of The Online Jeopardy! Test
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:16 am

Re: J! archive glossary question

Post by Rackme32 »

I dunno about the others, but Stay Clam is often used currently, though often shortened to something like "I clammed" instead of "I stayed clam".

User avatar
mfc248
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2015 8:08 pm
Location: Royersford, PA
Contact:

Re: J! archive glossary question

Post by mfc248 »

Some things I've noticed that could be updated as the archivists' time permits:

The two tiebreakers in Season 35 (#8023, 2019-06-26 — 2019 Teen Tournament, semifinal 3; #8039, 2019-07-18 — second tiebreaker in regular play) are not listed in the "Tiebreaker Round" section. Additionally, the words "(and to date only)" would need to be excised from the listing of the 2018-03-01 tiebreaker.

Similarly, the Final Jeopardy! Round entry reads as though co-champions are still permitted.

On the "prizes" page, the 2020 Teachers Tournament isn't listed and the 2020 College Championship game links are all dead (there is no number after game_id= in the URLs).
On the "all seasons" page: update Season 36 end date to 2020-06-12 (still has original projected end date of 2020-07-24).

User avatar
cinemaniax7
Humble Pi
Posts: 1189
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 2:04 pm
Location: Old Hickory, TN

Re: J! archive glossary question

Post by cinemaniax7 »

TenPoundHammer wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 12:15 am
So is it just me, or is the glossary more than a bit out of date? To wit:

* The "STAY CLAM" entry has links to posts on the old, pre-2011, long-since-defunct Sony board. Should those be removed (or possibly archived if someone has them)?

* Were "Bridges's Rule", "Falk's Law", "fearful wager", "Jeeks's Rule", etc. ever actually a thing? I don't remember any of those ever coming up on the old board (although it's possible that they were long before I joined -- I honestly don't remember posting there until about 2009), and if Google is correct, none of them have ever been used here.

I also think that the glossary would benefit from some of the more contemporary terms. For instance, LTAM shows up a lot in this forum as shorthand for the "Less than a minute" warnings.
You're one up on me, TPH. I use the archive fairly often, and I had no idea there WAS a glossary. :D

User avatar
TenPoundHammer
Otters are meant to swim
Posts: 8316
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:59 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: J! archive glossary question

Post by TenPoundHammer »

Rackme32 wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 6:09 pm
I dunno about the others, but Stay Clam is often used currently, though often shortened to something like "I clammed" instead of "I stayed clam".
I have no doubt that "clam" is in constant use. My issue was that the description linked to forum posts on the old Sony board that were deleted nine years ago, and somehow in these nine years the links have never been corrected. I've shot Mark a PM.
Ten Pound Hammer

This space for rent

GoodStrategy
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:59 pm

Re: J! archive glossary question

Post by GoodStrategy »

mfc248 wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:05 pm
Similarly, the Final Jeopardy! Round entry reads as though co-champions are still permitted.
Likewise with the wagering calculator.

User avatar
Robert K S
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 1924
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:26 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: J! archive glossary question

Post by Robert K S »

Are there any wagering scenarios in particular for which the generated suggestions that strike you as wrong after the rule change? My understanding is that it is not strategically wrong to play for the tie where you are forced to do so even after the rule change. It is more a matter of preference: do you feel lucky, punk? Well, do ya? (Or more precisely: when do you think you will be more lucky, in Final or in the Tiebreaker Round?)

Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: J! archive glossary question

Post by Golf »

Robert K S wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:43 am
Are there any wagering scenarios in particular for which the generated suggestions that strike you as wrong after the rule change? My understanding is that it is not strategically wrong to play for the tie where you are forced to do so even after the rule change. It is more a matter of preference: do you feel lucky, punk? Well, do ya? (Or more precisely: when do you think you will be more lucky, in Final or in the Tiebreaker Round?)
This is accurate for the lock-tie scenario. Although I wouldn't consider it luck, there are at least two things to consider. How you feel about the FJ category and what type of player is in 2nd place. If the FJ category is above average for you, you should tend to wager the dollar. If the player type in 2nd tends not to wager everything, you should tend to wager $0.

The numbers show that either wagering $0 or $1 results in similar winning chances. Any other wager is extremely sub-optimal. How much, if any, of this thought process that should be noted in the calculator is up to you guys.

GoodStrategy
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:59 pm

Re: J! archive glossary question

Post by GoodStrategy »

With a lock-tie the raw odds are the same either way, but the correlation effect with FJ! responses makes the $1 bet a bit more optimal (but either bet is perfectly acceptable depending on the specific circumstances).

In some scenarios (like "first equals second plus third") it's probably better to bet the extra dollar since by betting for a tie you're risking a tie in two outcome scenarios (RRx) if right vs. helping you in one (WWR) if wrong.

Based on my analysis probably the strongest case for going for the tie is in an exact 2/3 game with the player in third too distant to be a factor (or not playing at all) - even then both bets are sound choices.

Post Reply